The idea that nationalizing elections is characteristic of authoritarian regimes stems from the concentration of power, allowing a central authority to manipulate outcomes, control electoral information, and weaken opposition. We think this is exactly what Trump wants to do.
In contrast, democratic systems often decentralize election administration to local levels to increase trust, security, and prevent widespread fraud.
Arguments Linking Nationalized Elections to Authoritarianism
Centralized Control: Dictatorships use nationalized elections to gather information on voter support, monitor local officials, and eliminate threats.
“Coerced Balloting”: Experts sometimes refer to elections in autocratic regimes as “coerced balloting” or “sham elections” because they lack genuine choice and are designed to secure the incumbent’s power.
Propaganda Tools: Autocrats use highly controlled, centralized elections to project an image of legitimacy and popular mandate to the international community.
Election Administration Takeover would have dire consequences. The federal government would seize control of the “Times, Places and Manner” of elections, which are constitutionally reserved for states. Critics argue this would allow a single authority to control the entire system, similar to methods used in authoritarian states.